Time: Thu Jul 10 12:14:59 1997
by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA25421;
Thu, 10 Jul 1997 11:13:06 -0700 (MST)
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 14:12:28 -0400
Originator: heritage-l@gate.net
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
To: pmitch@primenet.com
Subject: SLS: Two Classes of Citizens -- The Lighter Side!
Since there are two classes of citizenship,
and since you enjoy the Right of Election
under the Tenth Amendment, all you really
need to do is to make what is called a
"Notorious Declaration", on record. This
assumes, of course, that you are already
a federal citizen. Appendix F in
"The Federal Zone" is as good a Declaration
as any, because it is loaded with authoritative
court citations and laws.
/s/ Paul Mitchell
http://www.supremelaw.com
At 11:09 AM 7/10/97 -0400, you wrote:
> How do I go about renouncing my U.S. citizenship?
> [http://www.straightdope.com/columns/970627.html]
>
>June 27, 1997
>
><< Dear Cecil:
>
>I'm thinking of renouncing my U.S. citizenship as a political protest. Where
>do I go to do this? What are the legal ramifications?
>
>--Doug, Auburn, Massachusetts >>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
>---------
>Cecil replies:
>
>Dear Doug:
>
>You're going to protest by renouncing your citizenship? You disappoint me.
>Whatever happened to going to the U.S. embassy and setting yourself on fire?
>
>OK, I understand, it's the 90s. And you've probably been reading in the
>papers about this guy Terry Nichols, Timothy McVeigh's alleged coconspirator
>in the Oklahoma City bombing, who supposedly renounced his citizenship in
>1992. You're thinking, "Wow, hanging around with future mass murderers while
>working as a farmhand and selling army surplus. What a cool lifestyle!"
>
>Whatever butters your bagel, pal. But you have to do it right. You probably
>have the idea that renouncing U.S. citizenship consists of going down to the
>town square, post office (the "all services" window, maybe?), or some other
>public place and announcing, "The U.S. sucks. I quit."
>
>Wrongo, Benedict Arnold breath. The process is actually pretty complicated,
>and for good reason. Renouncing your citizenship is irrevocable, the
>political equivalent of a sex-change operation. While the powers that be are
>willing to make the big slice if that's what you really want, they don't want
>you waking up the next morning and going, "Oh, @#$%!!"
>
>Here's the procedure:
>
>1.Leave the country. There's no procedure for renouncing your citizenship
>while still physically present in the U.S. The government has the idea that
>if you're mad enough to renounce your citizenship you probably don't want to
>keep living here (though most militia types seem to want to stick around,
>presumably to keep their disgust fresh). Also, most of the 800 or so people
>who renounce their U.S. citizenship each year are not protesters but cases of
>"dual citizenship" who haven't lived in the U.S. for a long time. Typically
>someone is born in the U.S. to non-U.S. parents, and the parents later return
>to their native land. Their child is automatically a U.S. citizen but also
>has a claim to his parents' nationality. While dual citizenship is usually
>not illegal--the U.S. "tolerates" it--it can complicate your life, notably at
>tax time. So many people choose one or the other when they reach adulthood.
>
>2.Apply for citizenship somewhere else. Strictly speaking, this is optional,
>in the sense that it's optional to put on the parachute before you jump out
>of the plane. But if you're a stateless person living abroad and you get in a
>jam with the local authorities, or you want to get a passport to travel to
>yet another country (or back to this one), you're up fecal matter creek.
>
>3.Go to a U.S. embassy or consulate and tell them you want to renounce your
>citizenship. Often they'll try to talk you out of it, tell you to come back
>after you've slept it off, etc. Persist. Eventually they'll have you sign an
>oath of renunciation, an affidavit affirming the oath, and a "statement of
>understanding," which basically asks you if you're sure you know what you're
>doing. You also have to supply certain tax-related info and turn in your
>passport. The consular officer overseeing the process must sign an
>attestation saying that in his opinion you're not off your nut. The papers
>will then be forwarded to the U.S. State Department, which in the fullness of
>time will issue you a Certificate of Loss of Nationality. You're officially
>un-American. Lotsa luck.
>
>One of many things to consider before you take this rash step is the kind of
>company you'll be keeping. Setting aside cases of dual nationality,
>emigrants, etc., people who renounce their citizenship typically are war
>criminals (who do it under the baleful eye of a judge to avoid the expense of
>a deportation hearing), the aforementioned militia members, and billionaire
>fat cats who want to avoid U.S. taxes (though the feds are tightening up on
>this--that's why they ask renunciants for tax info). My guess is you're not
>going to want to get together with these guys in some kind of support group.
>
>One last data point you might find interesting. In 1991 a survey asked 2,000
>U.S. citizens, "What are you willing to do for $10 million?" Twenty-five
>percent of this classy group said they'd abandon their families; 23 percent
>said they'd become a prostitute for a week. Only 16 percent said they'd
>renounce their U.S. citizenship.
>
>-- CECIL ADAMS
>Chicago Reader Newspaper
><cecil@chireader.com>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>In a message dated 97-07-04 23:52:11 EDT, pmitch@primenet.com (Paul Andrew
>Mitchell) writes:
>
><< Ex parte Knowles, 5 Cal. 300, California Supreme Court (1855), held that
>the states can naturalize:
>
>Briefly, Congress makes the INS rules, the states implement the rules.
>
>Moreover, Ex parte Knowles is crucial, because they also held that there was
>no such thing as a "citizen of the United States" at that time (1855)! I
>hope this helps.
>
> Happy Fourth of July to you and yours too!!
>
> /s/ Paul Mitchell
> http://www.supremelaw.com >>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
>----------
> >
> >Just a note from my experience...
> >
> >A casual meeting with a federal judge on imigration to wit:... The
> >states do not grant citizenship anymore. It's a federal task...
> >
> >It seems to me that the federal/state compact agreement has removed this
> >option... possibly based on the 14th amendment. Would you have anything
> >more definitive?
> >
> >Have a great Independence Day celebration.
> >
> >- Richard
> --------------------------------------------------
> At 09:05 AM 7/4/97 -0800, Paul Andrew Mitchell wrote:
> >>
> >> [This text is formatted in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
> >>
> >> It is quite clear, then, that there is a citizenship of
> >> the United States** and a citizenship of a State, which
> >> are distinct from each other and which depend upon
> >> different characteristics or circumstances in the
> >> individual.
> >>
> >> [Slaughter House Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1873)]
> >> [emphasis added]
> >>
> >> We have in our political system a Government of the
> >> United States** and a government of each of the several
> >> States. Each one of these governments is distinct from
> >> the others, and each has citizens of its own ....
> >> Slaughter-House Cases
> >>
> >> [United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)]
> >> [emphasis added]
> >>
> >> A person who is a citizen of the United States** is
> >> necessarily a citizen of the particular state in which
> >> he resides. But a person may be a citizen of a
> >> particular state and not a citizen of the United
> >> States**. To hold otherwise would be to deny to the
> >> state the highest exercise of its sovereignty, -- the
> >> right to declare who are its citizens.
> >>
> >> [State v. Fowler, 41 La. Ann. 380]
> >> [6 S. 602 (1889), emphasis added]
> >>
> >> There are, then, under our republican form of
> >> government, two classes of citizens, one of the United
> >> States** and one of the state. One class of citizenship
> >> may exist in a person, without the other, as in the
> >> case of a resident of the District of Columbia; but
> >> both classes usually exist in the same person.
> >>
> >> [Gardina v. Board of Registrars, 160 Ala. 155]
> >> [48 S. 788, 791 (1909), emphasis added]
> >>
> >> As quoted in the Preface of "The Federal Zone: Cracking the
> >> Code of Internal Revenue," electronic Seventh Edition.
> >>
> >> # # #
>=============================================================
> >> Paul Andrew Mitchell : Counselor at Law, federal witness
> >> B.A., Political Science, UCLA; M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine
> >>
> >> tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
> >> email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.2 on 586 CPU
> >> website: http://www.supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now
> >> ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best
> >> Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone
> >> Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this
> >>
> >> As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall
> >> not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
> >>
> >> [This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
>
>
>
========================================================================
Paul Andrew Mitchell : Counselor at Law, federal witness
B.A., Political Science, UCLA; M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine
tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU
website: http://www.supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best
Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone
Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this
As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
========================================================================
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]